Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


phill1c last won the day on November 28 2016

phill1c had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

599 Neutral

About phill1c

  • Rank
    2nd Year Veteran

Profile Information

  • Gender

Personal Info

  • Tell us a little bit about yourself...
    Jets fan since Joe Namath, but really, Richard Todd
  • Where do you live?
  • What are your interests? Hobbies?
    Following losing sports franchises
  • What do you do for a living?

Jets Info

  • What is your favorite Jets related memory?
    Kenny O'Brien to Wesley Walker, Jets win 51-45
  • Do you have season tickets?
  • What Jets memory broke your heart?
    Vinny Testaverde's 2000 INTs against the Ravens
  • Where you alive for Super Bowl III?

Recent Profile Visitors

1,520 profile views
  1. "T-14. NEW YORK JETS 2018 pass-blocking efficiency: 85.5 Heading into 2018, the Jets’ offensive line was correctly pegged as an underwhelming unit that was made up of average-level veterans. At the end of 2018, they met expectations. They allowed 17 sacks, 19 hits, and 115 hurries from their 581 passing plays in 2018." Underwhelming is what this OL is. Is it as bad as it has been the last few years? No. But it definitely needs better quality players, especially inside. But the tackles aren't much either. They could use a difference-maker somewhere on the OL. I hope the OG they got from the Raiders is an upgrade but that leaves 3 more positions that could use an upgrade.
  2. phill1c

    Is Bosa the right fit for us at 3?

    I'm not buying this contention. I think there are LBs who can cover RBs, TEs and WRs...for a limited time. I personally saw Demario Davis cover TEs, RBs, can't say WRs. I'm not saying they are shutdown covers, but they all aren't David Harris on a wheel route. Bottom line, I'd take Allen over Bosa. I think Allen is more versatile, whereas Bosa is strictly at the Line of Scrimmage. And I don't think he's as fluid or quick/fast as Allen. I mean, if you're going to pick Bosa, you might as well pick Williams and try for another edge rusher later on.
  3. Winters is a turnstile in both run and pass blocking. There's nothing tough about getting beat 70% of the time.
  4. with the Jets OL and QB situation over this period, it certainly clouds the assessment. IMO, the offensive coordination has been terrible since 2010, the last time anyone was successful running a "Ground and Pound" offense. LOLOLOL
  5. phill1c

    Goodbye 3-4

    Yes, I'm glad you mentioned that. To me, it's the classic "Nature vs. Nurture" argument: In other words, in the NFL most players have superior talent. I mean, this IS the best of the best. I think it's a big difference to say "Coples Sucks" if he were drafted by the Steelers. I mean, if you can't make it in Pittsburgh, where they have a tradition of winning and a virtual factory of defensive playmakers. If the Steelers had drafted Coples, they would have had a plan for him and he'd be coming into a situation. How much of Coples lack of success due to his own limitations, physical and/or mental? vs. being in a chaotic situation, playing out of position, etc.? Who knows... And then I also believe that second chances really diminish the odds of success, even with superior talent. And that is mostly mental. I'm sure I'm missing a lot of evidence here; I'm happy to discuss further...
  6. phill1c

    Goodbye 3-4

    I'm a Coples fan, actually. I'm not saying he lived up to potential because he didn't. But A LOT of that goes to the coaching staff, who never had a concrete plan and had the guy playing all over the field in roles he wasn't best suited for. Draft a DT in the first and play him at LB? Ask him to lose weight, gain weight... And, of course, being one of his fans, I thought the claims of laziness or lack of focus were oversold. And the man had some ******* hard @ss hits man.
  7. phill1c

    Goodbye 3-4

    Seems to offer significant draft flexibility, no? Just keep accumulating athletes vs. busts...
  8. I disagree here. Bowles didn't hire better coordinators because, if you were a competent coordinator, why would you want to work for Bowles? Moreover, Bowles is a competent DC himself, so maybe it's not the best job for an established DC. The notion that Bowles thought he wasn't a good head coach seems like a reach. And nobody would be breathing down his neck if they were winning.
  9. I don't think there's any one thing Todd Bowles could do to change things. Todd Bowles was not successful because: Bowles never seemed to understand how a head coach can positively influence a football game. He never took anyone by surprise. While a great motivator, I think his message of "humble winning" never resonated or, really, made any sense to the modern athlete. Bowles didn't understand offense. Yes, he understood how to react to other offenses, he didn't seem to grasp being offensive. As imaginative as he was with defensive schemes, he never gave the impression that offense was something he cared about. Now, while I believe Todd Bowles is a better coach than he showed, I am just not down with Under Dog persona. A successful head coach is cutthroat, not Bowles who seemed really, really dull. "yeah, we weren't ready to play...they really spanked us...in every phase of the game." I mean, wow, that gets old quickly. Bowles is a defensive tactician. He inspired nobody. His offensive philosophy was inept, prehistoric. Nothing tricky, nothing imaginative, nothing accomplished. The offense hasn't scored a first-drive TD in 24 games!! it's just abysmally lame!! I'm not thrilled with Gase, but it's not like Kotite. I mean, he's got to be better than Bowles, doesn't he? I mean, Will I remain in the wasteland of football, basketball, and baseball forever??
  10. It's very 1960s: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwif4PKThtjfAhWqUt8KHXm5A10QjRx6BAgBEAU&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metv.com%2Flists%2Fthese-21-old-logos-show-that-major-brands-looked-much-different-in-the-1960s&psig=AOvVaw1gS1kST5pBUeveh83lpkOJ&ust=1546826022359763
  11. Interesting that people are fixated on his lack of size and speed. I seem to remember a guy named Wayne Chrebet. He didn't have either but he could get open and caught everything. Watching mostly other offenses after the 6-game losing streak, it's apparent that it really didn't matter who was playing. The game plan was so abysmally simple that any defense could stop it.
  12. phill1c

    Todd Bowles defensive coordinator - Part II

    I don't know, this argument seems simplistic. Not at all to support Rogers, but he's also LOST two DEs--Richardson and Wilkerson--Lee, too, if you count suspension, which constitute the bulk [no pun intended] of these "early round picks". His free agents include "the player formerly known as Revis" and Buster "I give up as many as I defend" Skrine. This doesn't seem like he was given dominant free agents to work with. That said, he wouldn't know how to scheme his way out of a 4th and 22. So, he's not the answer.
  13. AND, Rex had actual talent to coach. Bowles lost his two 'pro bowl' DEs and the front seven is, on the whole, average. My issues with Bowles are about the offense. He's coached decently enough on the defensive side of the ball. And he has no real defensive coordinator. My issues are with how completely inept the offense has looked. And the sloppy, penalty filled stupidity that is week-in and week-out. Let's not elevate Ryan just to denigrate Bowles. Both are different sides of the same coin: defensive coordinators who really don't know dick about coaching offense or having an effective one.
  14. phill1c

    Ok...I'm convinced.

    I think obtaining a RB when the OL can't run block is absurdly wasteful. Current Jets RBs have shown what happens when you attempt to be a rush-first team with a poor run-blocking OL. It's wasteful and it kills RBs. Look at what it's done to Powell, Crowell, the guys before them. What's Bell doing to do when defenses are in the backfield? The NFL is a passing league now. Anyone can make yards rushing when you have an effective passing game? Why bother spending money on a name to get the same production? I'd rather somehow beef up the OL so that it becomes more powerful and technically sound. How that's done is not as important as that it gets done. The people whining about defense don't seem to get that yesterday's game was interesting because of the offense's development. The Jets lost but I'll take this kind of loss instead of the offensive bore-ball the Jets are known for. Anyway, I kind of agree with your post but I think the objective should be to build the OL, whatever it takes. That's what makes an offense work. That and reliable WRs.

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Websites, SEO & Social Media

Mile Social